NDLI: M/s. Bisco Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Customs
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Right to Information Act, 2005 (22 of 2005) Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Customs Act, 1962 – s.71 r/w. the proviso to s.28A, s.111 – The allegation of the respondent is that 264 cases were improperly or unauthorisedly removed from the notified warehouse as those were found lying outside the notified area but within the industrial/factory premises of the appellant – That apart, 27 cases were neither found inside the notified warehouse nor outside the said warehouse but within the factory premises of the appellant – In such circumstances, the respondent has justified the order dated 28.04.2005 (passed by the Commissioner),which was affirmed by the CESTAT vide order dated 30.04.2009 – Propriety: Held: The appellant had submitted that soil outside the notified area that become very sluggish due to heavy rains – As a result, the trailers carrying the consignment could not enter the notified warehouse and appellant had requested the concerned Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise to shift the machineries to under a shed within the factory premises – The permission was granted – The permission granted by the Superintendent to the appellant to unload a portion of the cargo outside the open space which was notified as public bonded warehouse but within the factory premises of the appellant was neither cancelled nor revoked by the Superintendent or even by the Commissioner – Infact, a view can reasonably be taken that the appellant as the owner of the goods had exercised its right u/s. 64(d) which was endorsed by the Superintendent – Therefore, it would not be correct to say that the 264 cases found outside the notified warehouse but within the factory premises of the appellant were improperly or unauthorisedly removed from the notified public bonded warehouse – Also, the period of warehousing had not expired and continued to remain operational in terms of the proviso to s.61 of the Customs Act – The decision of the respondent to invoke s.71 and thereafter levy interest on the goods covered by the 264 cases u/s. 28AB of the Customs Act was not justified – Since the imported goods covered by the 264 cases were never warehoused inside the notified public bonded warehouse but were unloaded outside the notified area but within the factory premises of the appellant and kept under a shed on permission granted by the Superintendent which permission was neither cancelled nor revoked, question of warehousing the goods covered by the 264 cases within the notified public bonded warehouse did not arise – However, there is no explanation on the part of the appellant qua the missing 27 cases – Therefore, the view taken by the respondent and affirmed by the CESTAT that those 27 cases were improperly or unauthorisedly removed from the notified public bonded warehouse is correct and requires no interference. [Paras 13, 50, 51, 53, 54]
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Neutral Citation	2024 INSC 231
Petitioner	M/s. Bisco Limited
Respondent	Commissioner Of Customs And Central Excise
SCR	[2024] 3 S.C.R. 890
Judgement Date	2024-03-20
Case Number	4663

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

M/s. Bisco Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise

Please Log-in to view this content

M/s Steel Authority of India Limited Vs. Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar

M/s Kushal Fertilisers (p) Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Meerut

Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Aurangabad Vs. M/s. Ceat Ltd., Mumbai

M/s Rollatainers Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - Iii

M/s Flex Engineering Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, U.p

M/s. Siv Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs

M/s. Uniworth Textiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur

M/s Crane Betel Nut Powder Works Vs. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Tirupathi and Anr.

M/s. Virlon Textile Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai

M/s. Bisco Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise

M/s. Bisco Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

M/s Steel Authority of India Limited Vs. Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Bhubaneswar

M/s Kushal Fertilisers (p) Ltd. Vs. The Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Meerut

Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Aurangabad Vs. M/s. Ceat Ltd., Mumbai

M/s Rollatainers Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi - Iii

M/s Flex Engineering Limited Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, U.p

M/s. Siv Industries Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs

M/s. Uniworth Textiles Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Raipur

M/s Crane Betel Nut Powder Works Vs. Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Tirupathi and Anr.

M/s. Virlon Textile Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Mumbai

M/s. Bisco Limited Vs. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise